A short war? I suspect not.

[HansNZ]

It is interesting to listen to American politicians, the American media, and the opinions of many Americans on this website. They are all taking about US forces going into Iraq, finishing the job and speculating about the occupation of that country.

This seems somewhat out of touch with reality. If you listen to the people in the region then this whole conflict is going to radicalise people. I suspect we will see pro-american governments in the region toppled left, right, and centre.

I suspect this war is going to esculate in unforseen ways. Even if Saddam himself is killed, that won't be the end, because there are going to be very nasty side-effects from this whole mis-adventure.

I think that Saddam has learned his lessons from the 1991 Gulf war and intends to follow a very different strategy. I suspect there will be a great deal of door to door fighting, and Guerilla tactics.

Iraq is not as isolated now as it was in 1991. As much as people in the region hate Sddam there is going to be sympahy for Iraq WHEN things start getting bogged down.

I also think that as much as Saddam is hated the American's agenda in the region is despised more by those who live there.

Outside the USA people feel that this is going to be a giant mess. It seems only in the US is there a widespread idea that the US is going to walk into Iraq, finish the job in a few weeks, everyone will be hugging US soldiers and George Bush will feel like the great conquering statesman.

What do other people think about this?

 

[havoc]

I think you're on the right track. peace

 

[the nature boy]

those guys are going to be surrendering by the tens of thousands. The morale of the troops is very very low

the republican guard will most likely fight to the death, I saw on the news there are execution squads that will shoot anyone who retreats.

However, the OCCUPATION of Iraq will take a long time.

 

[HansNZ]

those guys are going to be surrendering by the tens of thousands. The morale of the troops is very very low

the republican guard will most likely fight to the death, I saw on the news there are execution squads that will shoot anyone who retreats.

However, the OCCUPATION of Iraq will take a long time.

I think Saddam recognises that the bulk of his military will be of no use, and he is calculating this into his strategy. That is why it will be a war fought in the cities. The US will control the territory outside the cities quite quickly. But all the dead civilians from the protracted house to house battles is what is going to derail the US in the end.

 

[Y_lifter]

It seems only in the US is there a widespread idea that the US is going to walk into Iraq, finish the job in a few weeks, everyone will be hugging US soldiers and George Bush will feel like the great conquering statesman.

I have not seen or heard anyone say it will be quick as in weeks.
Even GW said last night it will not be quick but that the outcome is certain.
War is not pretty or fun but someone has to do it...

I have yet to hear an alternative approach other than giving him more time.

What is your Idea to resolve this, other than waiting 12 more years and adding more sanctions that don't work with dictators that don't care about thier people hans?

 

[catharsis]

long war???

Long war????? I think not. You kinda sound like those same people who said we will get our asses handed to us by the "battle hardned Iraqi Soldiers" during the first gulf war. "Iraq has been fighting wars for centuries and we don't know what we're getting ourselves into".....Blah Blah Blah,



How about when we were contiplating war with Afghanistan
People said "this will be our next Vietnam" , "Look what they did to Russia", "Afghanistan has been fighting for hundreds of years and are battle hardned and experienced". Blah Blah Blah again.




This will be like every other time, we will utterly smoke their ass!

 

[HansNZ]

[BI have yet to hear an alternative approach other giving him more time.

What is your Idea to resolve this, other than waiting 12 more years and adding more sanctions that don't work with dictators that don't care about thier people hans? [/B]

Weapons inspections were working. Whether they would have finished the job in another story. However while they were working war was unnecessary. That is why resolution 1441 does not authorise force. Hans Blix had not come back and said that he was unable to make progress. If he had done that then things would be different. He did not. That is why the majority of the security council would not support a US-UK-Spanish resolution and why these countries didn't put one up for a vote.

Secondly Iraq is not a major WMD threat - that is a claim made by the US government and its minions. You can believe it if you wish, I don't. If you watch the US media or listened to US politicians you'd swear it was some proven fact or even credible assertion.

You are right, sanctions don't work. 600,000 dead Iraqi kids and a dictator who is as much in power as ever is testiment to that. The only way to deal with Iraq is containment.

As for dictators who kill their own people - he does indeed do that. That doesn't justify foreigners coming in and killing more of his people. Western powers should be more mindful of the dictators they support and arm in the future so that they do not create more Saddam Husseins.

 

[MattTheSkywalker]

It is interesting to listen to American politicians, the American media, and the opinions of many Americans on this website. They are all taking about US forces going into Iraq, finishing the job and speculating about the occupation of that country.

This seems somewhat out of touch with reality. If you listen to the people in the region then this whole conflict is going to radicalise people. I suspect we will see pro-american governments in the region toppled left, right, and centre.

Who will it radicalize? This is a very general statement.

I suspect this war is going to esculate in unforseen ways. Even if Saddam himself is killed, that won't be the end, because there are going to be very nasty side-effects from this whole mis-adventure.

This too is very general. Be specific. otherwise it sound like America-bashing for the sake of doing so, rather than well-thought-out criticism.

I think that Saddam has learned his lessons from the 1991 Gulf war and intends to follow a very different strategy. I suspect there will be a great deal of door to door fighting, and Guerilla tactics.

It is not US Army doctrine to go door to door and clear eachbuilding. I did a lot of that when I was an Army Ranger andyou are right it is brutal. As such, Army doctrine is to flatten an entire city block with bombs, then clear it with troops. Much easier that way.

Iraq is not as isolated now as it was in 1991. As much as people in the region hate Sddam there is going to be sympahy for Iraq WHEN things start getting bogged down.

What is the consequence of this?

I also think that as much as Saddam is hated the American's agenda in the region is despised more by those who live there.

What is the consequence of this?

Outside the USA people feel that this is going to be a giant mess. It seems only in the US is there a widespread idea that the US is going to walk into Iraq, finish the job in a few weeks, everyone will be hugging US soldiers and George Bush will feel like the great conquering statesman.

What do other people think about this?

I see a quick decimation of opposing forces. The bogging down could ocme in the post-war time....that is the real challenge.

 

[The Ranger]

Let's look at their Air Force power.....Nil.
Naval....Nada
Ground to air missels...Scuds??
Ground Troops...Currently starving, and under motivated. Top officals are now defecting.
Door to door fighting....This means well trained, and equipted soliders, against handguns, AK's used by civvies with little or no training at all....

Let us not forget the Turkish Kurds, once it starts, they'll be sitting pretty in the oil fields.....

Total time for outcome....3 weeks or less.

Ranger

 

[catharsis]

As for dictators who kill their own people - he does indeed do that. That doesn't justify foreigners coming in and killing more of his people. Western powers should be more mindful of the dictators they support and arm in the future so that they do not create more Saddam Husseins.

Ahhh, so damnit we should've stayed out of WW2 and let the genocide continue. Should've stayed out of Bosnia as well.

 

[The Ranger]

Also do not forget in 85 Isarel bombed SH Nuke plant, just months before it was to be completed....the USA condemed this attack.....Now, I guess we are thanking our lucky stars....

I also look for SH to fire missels into Isarel much the same as the Gulf War, however, Isarel has already stated they will respond with force this time....should prove interesting what the Arab Nations will do if this happens...

Ranger

 

[HumorMe]

Is New Zealand an actually country?

 

[The Ranger]

Sure is Frodo Baggins lives there....

Ranger

 

[HansNZ]

Is New Zealand an actually country?

It sounds like you are casting dispursions about where I live so that you can avoid discussing the issue we are debating.

At least you are not deflecting the topic onto my sexuality. That is usually what happens when people can't compete on facts.

 

[HansNZ]

Ahhh, so damnit we should've stayed out of WW2 and let the genocide continue. Should've stayed out of Bosnia as well.

Those are differnt conflicts. Don't deflect to avoid confronting the issue.

 

[jnuts]

Western powers should be more mindful of the dictators they support and arm in the future so that they do not create more Saddam Husseins.

"The enemy of my enemy is my friend"

That's just politics as usual and not confined to the "Western" powers.

 

[Y_lifter]

Russia was into a Noncombative agreement with the Axis during WWII until they started getting combatted..

Then they changed teams.

Smart of them.
Just like the US did with Iran vs Iraq... Afghan vs Iran... etc

 

[HumorMe]

It sounds like you are casting dispursions about where I live so that you can avoid discussing the issue we are debating.

At least you are not deflecting the topic onto my sexuality. That is usually what happens when people can't compete on facts.

New Zealand's support for the war

They seemed kind of reluctant to join the war but after reading the last paragraph, it all comes in to view.

 

[HansNZ]

Re: Re: A short war? I suspect not.

Who will it radicalize? This is a very general statement.

It will radicalise many muslims who are sitting on the fence. I believe terrorist organisations will see a swelling of their ranks. It will swing general public opinion in the middle east away from the US even more, and probably towards favouring those whole advocate quite brutal and aggressive anti-american policies. Osama Bin Laden types will enjoy much more sympahy among the mainstream.

[how will it escalate] This too is very general. Be specific. otherwise it sound like America-bashing for the sake of doing so, rather than well-thought-out criticism.

I believe it is going to escalate in term of the Kurds, the Iranians, and the toppling of currently pro-american regimes such as the Saudis. The Israelis may become involved at some point. I also believe it will escalate in ways we haven't anticipated - the wild card.

It is not US Army doctrine to go door to door and clear eachbuilding. I did a lot of that when I was an Army Ranger andyou are right it is brutal. As such, Army doctrine is to flatten an entire city block with bombs, then clear it with troops. Much easier that way.

Well whether they go door to door or flatten entire city blocks, lots of civilians will be killed. I was seeing door-to-door fighting as causing a mess re: civilians. That was the problem I was refering to. Flattening city blocks will have the same effect on world opinion.

HansNZ wrote: Iraq is not as isolated now as it was in 1991. As much as people in the region hate Saddam there is going to be sympahy for Iraq WHEN things start getting bogged down.

MattTheSkyWalker replied: What is the consequence of this?

A spread of conflict beyond the Iraqi army and Saddam, esp. into the areas and populations/countries I mentioned earlier.

HansNZ wrote: I also think that as much as Saddam is hated the American's agenda in the region is despised more by those who live there.

MattTheSkyWalker replied: What is the consequence of this?

A spreading of conflict fueled by anti-american sentiment.

I see a quick decimation of opposing forces. The bogging down could ocme in the post-war time....that is the real challenge.

Well that's similar to what I mean. I suspect 95% of the Iraqi forces will be captured or killed quite quickly. It is the messy stuff that follows which will breed the problems. I doubt there will be a clean conclusion to this conflict.

 

[HansNZ]

New Zealand's support for the war

They seemed kind of reluctant to join the war but after reading the last paragraph, it all comes in to view.

LOL, the journalist who wrote that is dreaming. If Helen Clarke genuinely supported this war she'd be committing political suicide. What she is doing is trying not to alienate the Aussies or Americans too much because she is coming under pressure from Washington which is threatening not to include NZ in a free trade agreement.

What you are observing is the way small countries have to walk a thin line in international relations. Beacuse you live in a large country you are not familiar with this kind of political behaviour. I think you are also misinterpreting what you are reading, as well as sourcing your information from a rather ideologically charged doctrinaire publication putting its own communist spin on events.

In any case, my opinions are my own. I am not a spokesman for my country. I speak for myself. My opinions would be the same even if NZ supported this silly war. In any case, like John Howard in Australia such a policy would not reflect the will of the NZ public.

 

[primetime21]

a long war??? hahaha

this is what most anti-war people fail to realize:

first, the iraqi people hate hussein just as much as we do and many of the soldiers will flat surrender, and in fact many have already surrendered or have plans to surrender once the war begins. This comes from a friend of mine who worked in Iraq just a few months ago. These people are smarter than you think and know that life will be better without hussein.

two, the iraqi army, EVEN at full strength has no shot. Door to door combat?? yeah sure. there will be very few troops sent in, until the smart-weapons have completely wiped out much of the threat. Will the US loose troops?? of course. Does that suck big time?? 100 percent. But that is the price you have to pay.

three, other countries in the region have no balls. These people live in pverty as their rulers make billions. If they havent gotten pissed off already, what makes you think this will now? and what pro-us countries are there in the middle east? Israel (not a problem). The other nations arent going to help the US in anyway fight this war.. nor should they. Because in doing so it would cause problems.

Lets be real here folks, the same people saying that this war will be trouble said the EXACT same thing in the gulf war and said that "those afghany people have been through many wars and are really TOUGH!!!" You cant be tough when a missle from a ship 100 miles away is launching missles to within a few feet of its target.

The main problem i see, is that if iraq should attack israel AGAIN, israel may retaliate. That can be a problem. But i am guessing israel and the US have something worked out.

 

[jnuts]

Re: Re: Re: A short war? I suspect not.

I believe it is going to escalate in term of the Kurds, the Iranians, and the toppling of currently pro-american regimes such as the Saudis. The Israelis may become involved at some point. I also believe it will escalate in ways we haven't anticipated - the wild card.

"No plan survives first contact with the enemy."

Yep, quite possible that the unforseen will happen. With regards to Iran, you can count on them getting a little pissy and maybe trying to take advantange of the situation. There is a little bit of open source info on this at:

http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=b2vuls%248fs%241%40reader10.wxs.nl&output=gplain

The Isrealis very will could become involved. Especially if chem is used. Don't disagree with you.

While Pols and Planners try to anticipate the outcome, it is folly to assume that we can totally predict the future. We can predict short term effects fairly well, not long term effects / outcomes with regards to what will happen.

Nobody said this shit was easy.

Well that's similar to what I mean. I suspect 95% of the Iraqi forces will be captured or killed quite quickly. It is the messy stuff that follows which will breed the problems. I doubt there will be a clean conclusion to this conflict.

I don't disagree with you on this. Baghdad will become the Stalingrad of this century. Not a good prospect.

 

[HumorMe]

LOL, the journalist who wrote that is dreaming. If Helen Clarke genuinely supported this war she'd be committing political suicide. What she is doing is trying not to alienate the Aussies or Americans too much because she is coming under pressure from Washington which is threatening not to include NZ in a free trade agreement.

It's been mentioned before and will be mentioned again that Bush is doing this for the oil and American interests abroad.

If that's true then NZ is doing the same thing. Without free trade with Australia and the US and the luxuries that come with it, NZ would be screwed.

Why do you hate the US and its politics?

 

[Y_lifter]

12 years of Inspections have done a good job.
He still has Illegal weapons.

12 more years of inspections and he still would have them and probably more..

 

[HansNZ]

It's been mentioned before and will be mentioned again that Bush is doing this for the oil and American interests abroad.

If that's true then NZ is doing the same thing. Without free trade with Australia and the US and the luxuries that come with it, NZ would be screwed.

Why do you hate the US and its politics?

NZ isn't supporting the US in this war. Clark is simply attempting not to ruffle feathers. Her party has a pacifist base and would never allow her to let NZ become involved.

She is trying her best to salvage hope for a free-trade agreement by being obscure about where she stands. If it ever got to the point where NZ soldiers were shooting at Iraqis she'd be out of office.

 

[HansNZ]

12 years of Inspections have done a good job.
He still has Illegal weapons.

12 more years of inspections and he still would have them and probably more..

The inspections up until the US sabotaged them in 1998 did an EXCELLENT job. Saddam was 95% disarmed by these.

France said that if the current inspections were allowed to run their course and all of Saddam's weapons hadn't been accounted for it would have supported the war. Sadly the US has another agenda.

 

[atlantabiolab]

I see this war as a mixture of rational and irrational reasons, and understand that it is not a picture-perfect example of "good" politics, but an argument that I continue to hear is "we should not go to war, because civilians may/will be killed".

Is this a valid reason, in the context of this war? Leaving Saddam in power is to understand that the people will remain enslaved, all of them, and at the mercy and whim of an evil man, who in the past and present has commited atrocities towards men, women and children. To go to war is to attempt to liberate, and do not misconstrue this to mean "democratize" or "westernize" this country, which I do not believe is going to happen, from horrible oppression.

Is there a "right" to maintain slavery, murder, and torture, or is there a moral "right" to liberate? Even if some are killed, unintentionaly? Do those in Iraq, who wish to allow Saddam to remain in power, have the right to perpetuate despotism, to possibly keep themselves alive? Saddam kills individuals intentionally, for personal reasons. Going to war, which brings in context with it, death, does not, in this situation, have the intention of death, but violent excision of an evil regime, and death is a secondary effect.

We have intervened in foreign affairs too long and we are paying the price of meddling, but we have gone too far to pull back, and in this instance, killing a dictator is a valid rationale for war.

 

[HumorMe]

NZ isn't supporting the US in this war. Clark is simply attempting not to ruffle feathers. Her party has a pacifist base and would never allow her to let NZ become involved.

She is trying her best to salvage hope for a free-trade agreement by being obscure about where she stands. If it ever got to the point where NZ soldiers were shooting at Iraqis she'd be out of office.

Well, the article I posted said NZ had 1 whole ship and 1 recon plane there supporting the buildup in Iraq.

quoted from the article

"Her defence of Howard came just two weeks after New Zealand dispatched a naval warship and an Orion reconnaissance aircraft to join the military buildup around Iraq."

 

[TerraNoble]

It's been mentioned before and will be mentioned again that Bush is doing this for the oil and American interests abroad.

If that's true, then NZ is doing the same thing. Without free trade with Australia and the US and the luxuries that come with it, NZ would be screwed.

Why do you hate the US and its politics?

\

Lets be serious!
The NZ guy is just stating his own point of view in regard to the wasr and its consequences.

By disagreeing with most of you guys who support the war, that doessn't mean that he hates USA.

He seems an articulate person who brings solid arguments on the table regarding the outcome of the war.

As far as his sexuality goes , I do not agree with his choice ,but I also do not care as this should not be used as an argument in any debate.

Going back to the original topic, I will say that this will be a lot nastier than it was 12 years ago and it may bring more chaos than ever in the region.

Regardless of the duration of the war, the most DIFFICULT part will be the aftermath of the war as who is going to run the country or how long the US forces will be around or how the Arab worldis gonna swallow the US Army being injected in the middle of the Arab world.

Irak is a very divided country and it will be very difficult to come up with some sort of government that will satisfy all parts.

Kurds have their own agenda. Shiites have their own also.

It will be a total mess!!

 

[Y_lifter]

being obscure about where she stands

What a fine leader...

 

[HansNZ]

Well, the article I posted said NZ had 1 whole ship and 1 recon plane there supporting the buildup in Iraq.

Well if this is what the NZ military is saying these ships are actually doing then Clark has a big problem on her hands. She has already stated that this war is illegal under international law, so if what is written in the article is true she'd in BIG legal trouble.

Helen Clark is too shrewd to put herself in that situation which leads me to suspect some rather unsubstantiated claims in that article. I am sure Clark's numerous political enemies would be all over this by now if there was anything to it.

 

[Jae]

Bush doing this for the oil? I don't think so. That sounds very sound and logic, but I don't think that is the reason. That would be like saying he is doing this to deflect attention from the fact our unemployment is sky high, our economy sucks and we STILL have not found a fucking cave hermit in Afganistan.

I honestly do not think the war will last very long. It is natural thinking to reason that Saddam has taken remedy precautions against all his mistakes and losses from the first Gulf War. However, you have to remember that the Iraqi soldiers remember all too well what happened then and I expect them to be surrendering by the hundreds of thousands after the first shot. No one wants to play for a losing team. They have nothing to gain but death either way you look at it. Might as well cast your dice with the victor and hope for better treatment.

The main concern is that from the first Gulf War, Saddam made mortal enemies of the Kurds and with Isreal. Rather than fight us directly, he launched missile attacks on Isreal and then out of anger gassed all those Kurds after the war. I think the big problem is that when the war is under way, Isreal and Kurds are going to be frothing at the mouth and crazed with bloodlust and we could very well see an entire massacre of Saddam and his regime.

Not that I would shed a tear.

 

[HansNZ]

being obscure about where she stands

What a fine leader...

She's a typical politician.

 

[HumorMe]

Bush doing this for the oil? I don't think so. That sounds very sound and logic, but I don't think that is the reason. That would be like saying he is doing this to deflect attention from the fact our unemployment is sky high, our economy sucks and we STILL have not found a fucking cave hermit in Afganistan.

Jae

I just stated that "oil" has been used as Bush's logic for war, which I don't believe. I was using that logic to point out to HansNZ, that if that was the case then NZ is using that same logic to get into a free trade agreement with Australia and the US.

HansNZ

I don't know if that article is true or not but I am assuming it is true. Do you really know where NZ stands on this war. Sounds like they are supporting it secretly and denouncing it publicly.

Again....why do you hate the US and it's politics?

 

[Y_lifter]

No one has mentioned the Turks in this discussion..
Another Wild card, as they have eyes on the prize and may
take advantage..

 

[Jae]

Yeah, I don't think oil is the issue either. However I WILL tell you this. 100% of other countries are convinced this is why the U.S. has this agenda. I just returned from Brazil and everyone of those people down there is utterly convinced the U.S. is just scheming to get their hands on the oil. I saw lots of anti-american graffitti all over San P. and Rio. DEATH TO USA was quite common.

 

[Jae]

Yeah, I don't think oil is the issue either. However I WILL tell you this. 100% of other countries are convinced this is why the U.S. has this agenda. I just returned from Brazil and everyone of those people down there is utterly convinced the U.S. is just scheming to get their hands on the oil. I saw lots of anti-american graffitti all over San P. and Rio. DEATH TO USA was quite common.

 

[The Almighty]

The inspections up until the US sabotaged them in 1998 did an EXCELLENT job. Saddam was 95% disarmed by these.

I would love to see your sources for this info.

 

[louden_swain]

Lets get this show on the road!!

 

[VicTusDeuS]

Yeah, I don't think oil is the issue either. However I WILL tell you this. 100% of other countries are convinced this is why the U.S. has this agenda. I just returned from Brazil and everyone of those people down there is utterly convinced the U.S. is just scheming to get their hands on the oil. I saw lots of anti-american graffitti all over San P. and Rio. DEATH TO USA was quite common.

All these sceond class countries hating on the American way. What does Brazil produce thats of any importance anyways other than soccer players...I bet half those people would die for the chance to be here and increase the illegal population.

 

[HansNZ]

bump.

 

[primetime21]

bump to show how wrong those people were when they said the war was going to be hard and long.

 

[vixenbabe]

bump to show how wrong those people were when they said the war was going to be hard and long.

It AIN'T over til the fat Iraqi lady sings....

 

[Bikini Mod]

All these sceond class countries hating on the American way. What does Brazil produce thats of any importance anyways other than soccer players...I bet half those people would die for the chance to be here and increase the illegal population.

Ummmm wrong. I know of MANY Brazilians who come to this country for a short time, make USD and go home with a little xtra cash for an EASIER way of life.

I do know of a few who did stay but who now regret that decision to a certain degree.

I am not saying that the US isn't a grand country, because it is. But what many Americans don't realize is that this is not the center of the universe while the rest of the world's countries are THIRD WORLD.

Think that all you like. Sorry, but it just ain't so.

 

[CanadianCripple]

Hmph! I actually thought Hans had shown up to try & tell us how Iraqi's are now being forced to act happy by US troops.

Brazil... interesting country too. Here's another example of a country with vast wealth in natural resources & SHOULD be well off, but is not, do to a backwards political system & an undereducated population.

 

[Bikini Mod]

I have never been to Brazil so I can only go by the Brazilian people that I have met. And from what they tell me and form I have seen, the ratio of the women who come to this country to "make a quick buck" to the ratio of women who come to this country to immigrate is high. They come here with no intention of staying. Bust their behinds to make USD and go home.

I think that the majority of Americans are under the impression that THE ENTIRE REST OF THE WORLD is struggling in slums, starving with no hope of a better life. (Perhaps this is a gross exaggeration but I think you guys get what I am saying.) And that just isn't true.

As a matter of fact I have friends in many other countries and they actually feel badly for Americans. They believe that Americans bust their asses and struggle to gain as many material possessions as their money can afford then drop dead at an early age from stress, overwork and chasing an unattainable goal.

There are many countries where citizens work and have MORE than enough and value their FREE TIME more than anything else. They take time away from work during the day (as in long lunches, etc) and ALWAYS vacation several weeks out of the year. They also have good health care that ALL have access to (and yes, of course, those with more money have access to better EVERYTHING) and their crime rate is no worse than what is ours.

Is the American dollar king? Yes, in most cases yes, it is. You'll get no arguement from me there. BUT what one has to do in this country in order to gain that dollar and what they can have for it in exchange just isn't what it once was...

 

[jnuts]

bump to show how wrong those people were when they said the war was going to be hard and long.

While we might have a short term victory with Baghdad falling, this war is far from over. It is going quicky and well at this stage, but that end state solution - where the State dept. goes to work and not the mil.... it's a bit more murky.

end states are a bitch.

 

[Testosterone boy]

While we might have a short term victory with Baghdad falling, this war is far from over. It is going quicky and well at this stage, but that end state solution - where the State dept. goes to work and not the mil.... it's a bit more murky.

end states are a bitch.

Yes....it will take time to make it appear that we must go into Syria.

 

[Lao Tzu]

It AIN'T over til the fat Iraqi lady sings....

pe-shaw. I heard there are only a few brigades of official Iraqi army units left. The Rep. Guard has about 10 tanks now. The only city not under coalition control is Tikrit. All that exist now are the dumbass terrorists and guerella fighters.

 

[atlantabiolab]

I have never been to Brazil so I can only go by the Brazilian people that I have met. And from what they tell me and form I have seen, the ratio of the women who come to this country to "make a quick buck" to the ratio of women who come to this country to immigrate is high. They come here with no intention of staying. Bust their behinds to make USD and go home.

This paragraph just showed that the US is superior in freedom of opportunity (right of pursuit of happiness). If Brazil was equal to the US, then there would be no need for Brazilians, or any other citizens, to come to the US, work for a strong currency and then return home where the buying power of the dollar is greater. This shows that the ability to ATTAIN possessions, security, leisure, etc. is not as great as in the US. Any American can do this same thing, it is just that countries such as Brazil do not offer the same protections to civil liberty that the US affords.

As a matter of fact I have friends in many other countries and they actually feel badly for Americans. They believe that Americans bust their asses and struggle to gain as many material possessions as their money can afford then drop dead at an early age from stress, overwork and chasing an unattainable goal.

There are many countries where citizens work and have MORE than enough and value their FREE TIME more than anything else. They take time away from work during the day (as in long lunches, etc) and ALWAYS vacation several weeks out of the year. They also have good health care that ALL have access to (and yes, of course, those with more money have access to better EVERYTHING) and their crime rate is no worse than what is ours.

Is the American dollar king? Yes, in most cases yes, it is. You'll get no arguement from me there. BUT what one has to do in this country in order to gain that dollar and what they can have for it in exchange just isn't what it once was...

The countries that you speak of, mainly European, do alot their citizens many privileges of leisure, at the cost of regulation and reduced freedom. The conditions of overwork and stress that you mention are self-inflicted, they are not due to forced labour, they are a by-product of man's desires. But in the US, you are free to pursue work for whatever motivation you have. If you desire more money, then you can work for more, although the US is modeling itself on the European system with its tax disincentives, and reducing this desire . Many European countries are restricting their citizens from working overtime, France is actually penalizing those who do this. Is this freedom? Is this the right to pursue happiness and property? You stated that these country's citizens have "MORE than enough", what is "more than enough"? How do you decide what is enough for another person. This is the mentality of socialism, which states that people should only have their needs met, not their desires.

Talking to co-workers from Germany, they criticise Americans for our work ethic and "greed" for material possessions, and they believe that they have consciously chosen to avoid this lifestyle, yet upon further questioning it becomes obvious that they have not chosen this, but are prevented from "want" because it is often placed outside of their reach. The cost of living is much higher in many European countries than in the US: homes, cars, gas, etc., all through government restrictions. Land regulations increase the cost of building homes, which increases the cost of available homes. The cost of gas is higher, due to government regulations on pollution, plus added taxes, which reduces the desire of one to travel or have several cars.

Visiting Germany, one can see the benefit of government distribution of wealth and cradle to grave security: lack of work ethic and reduced availability of goods. Go to Germany and try to find a store comparable to a Super Walmart. You can't find a store that is open after 6:00 pm, not to mention on some days the government does not allow stores to open, and if you do find one open your choices are menial. A German co-worker visiting the US was astounded at how many cheeses WalMart carried!!! Is that the freedom of the socialist market? Visit a restaurant or cafe and see how long it takes to be waited on. Workers take 20-30 minutes to wait on a customer, yet locals see nothing wrong with this.

People need to realize that each man is dependant on his own happiness and possessions, not the responsibility of the nation. With freedom comes responsibilty. If you desire security, that you do not provide yourself, government will grant it at the expense of liberty.

 

[Bikini Mod]

I can see what you are saying completely. But think about this. If those Brazilians (and whomever else does this) were truly unhappy with life where they were, they were allowed to come here and make mad USD, then why would they return home? Would they not stay here?

I know of many Europeans that come here, work for a while and decide that it is just not worth sacrifice to come here. True, we might have a larger selection of cheeses at 3AM at Walmart but this is better how?

I was aghast at how "rude" waiters and waitresses in France were this summer past. My French friend explained to me that that service person was not rude at all. That they were paid MORE THAN ENOUGH of an hourly wage that they did not HAVE TO KISS EITHER MY AMERICAN ASS OR HIS FRENCH ASS in order to make enough money that evening to pay his bills. That service person's job was to take my order and bring me my food. PERIOD.

And yes, I am fully aware of the French "35 hour" rule. And I don't view this as being restrictive at all. What could possibly be wrong with being paid enough to support yourself to live with more than enough "things" and more than enough "free time" in working THIRTY-FIVE HOURS P/WEEK?! Why on earth would I want to work longer hours unless I could not suport myself OR my family?

 

[Lift Chief]

Not a very long or hard war we now see... interesting theory though, hansnz.

 

[vixenbabe]

pe-shaw. I heard there are only a few brigades of official Iraqi army units left. The Rep. Guard has about 10 tanks now. The only city not under coalition control is Tikrit. All that exist now are the dumbass terrorists and guerella fighters.

It could take ONLY one brigade to do some serious damage to our men and women, Nord. I fear the prospect of Tikrit being his final stand with these terrorist pricks! He may have something NASTY waiting for our masses there. Tirkrit is, after all, his birth place and the Ba'ath parties rat nest/center.

It's not going to be over in my eyes til EVERY last one of our troops are HOME and safe from these pricks!

 

[Lift Chief]

It could take ONLY one brigade to do some serious damage to our men and women, Nord. I fear the prospect of Tikrit being his final stand with these terrorist pricks! He may have something NASTY waiting for our masses there. Tirkrit is, after all, his birth place and the Ba'ath parties rat nest/center.

It's not going to be over in my eyes til EVERY last one of our troops are HOME and safe from these pricks!

From a military standpoint we have won this war. Some of our troops still may die, certainly, but the bulk of the fighting is clearly over.

 

[vixenbabe]

From a military standpoint we have won this war. Some of our troops still may die, certainly, but the bulk of the fighting is clearly over.

Agreed..But...I still fear that he's going to have something waiting for us there. I just have this sick feeling.

As far as the bomb dropping and "war"..I agree we kicked their ass...But...We have soooo much work to do yet!

Anyone recall Haiti? AND...We still are not done in "Bin Laden Land" either....

Nothing like this plan from our gov. is gonna come easy...We got a lot of work to do there.

PEACE!

 

[ariolanine]

This paragraph just showed that the US is superior in freedom of opportunity (right of pursuit of happiness). If Brazil was equal to the US, then there would be no need for Brazilians, or any other citizens, to come to the US, work for a strong currency and then return home where the buying power of the dollar is greater. This shows that the ability to ATTAIN possessions, security, leisure, etc. is not as great as in the US. Any American can do this same thing, it is just that countries such as Brazil do not offer the same protections to civil liberty that the US affords.



The countries that you speak of, mainly European, do alot their citizens many privileges of leisure, at the cost of regulation and reduced freedom. The conditions of overwork and stress that you mention are self-inflicted, they are not due to forced labour, they are a by-product of man's desires. But in the US, you are free to pursue work for whatever motivation you have. If you desire more money, then you can work for more, although the US is modeling itself on the European system with its tax disincentives, and reducing this desire . Many European countries are restricting their citizens from working overtime, France is actually penalizing those who do this. Is this freedom? Is this the right to pursue happiness and property? You stated that these country's citizens have "MORE than enough", what is "more than enough"? How do you decide what is enough for another person. This is the mentality of socialism, which states that people should only have their needs met, not their desires.

Talking to co-workers from Germany, they criticise Americans for our work ethic and "greed" for material possessions, and they believe that they have consciously chosen to avoid this lifestyle, yet upon further questioning it becomes obvious that they have not chosen this, but are prevented from "want" because it is often placed outside of their reach. The cost of living is much higher in many European countries than in the US: homes, cars, gas, etc., all through government restrictions. Land regulations increase the cost of building homes, which increases the cost of available homes. The cost of gas is higher, due to government regulations on pollution, plus added taxes, which reduces the desire of one to travel or have several cars.

Visiting Germany, one can see the benefit of government distribution of wealth and cradle to grave security: lack of work ethic and reduced availability of goods. Go to Germany and try to find a store comparable to a Super Walmart. You can't find a store that is open after 6:00 pm, not to mention on some days the government does not allow stores to open, and if you do find one open your choices are menial. A German co-worker visiting the US was astounded at how many cheeses WalMart carried!!! Is that the freedom of the socialist market? Visit a restaurant or cafe and see how long it takes to be waited on. Workers take 20-30 minutes to wait on a customer, yet locals see nothing wrong with this.

People need to realize that each man is dependant on his own happiness and possessions, not the responsibility of the nation. With freedom comes responsibilty. If you desire security, that you do not provide yourself, government will grant it at the expense of liberty.

Excellent Post!!!!!!!!!!

 

[dawookie]

I can see what you are saying completely. But think about this. If those Brazilians (and whomever else does this) were truly unhappy with life where they were, they were allowed to come here and make mad USD, then why would they return home? Would they not stay here?

I know of many Europeans that come here, work for a while and decide that it is just not worth sacrifice to come here. True, we might have a larger selection of cheeses at 3AM at Walmart but this is better how?

My girl works in the same profession you do, and we have friends from other countries that come here, save, and go back... Im sure many of our friends in the same situation as the people you know.

The reason most go back is because they are not legal to stay here longer or they have family that they will be bringing the money back to support. If they could stay they probably would.

That and chances are they do not have the education or experience to get a job other than "dancing" that will supply them with enough money to live comfortably here in the US. In Brazil they can buy a house for their entire family with savings from working in the US.. If they did decide to stay, much of the money they made would be sent back home to support the rest of their family..

And the people in Brazil, Costa Rica, and other S. American countries look up to these people that come to the US to work/live. Many have this dream but do not have the desire/means to move here..